In the 1934 case of Norman v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., the United States Supreme Court ruled that a railroad company could not be held liable for injuries sustained by an employee who was injured while performing tasks outside his regular duties and without direct orders from superiors. The plaintiff, Mr. Norman, was employed as a fireman but voluntarily took on additional responsibilities to repair a water plug which resulted in injury when he slipped on ice. He sought compensation under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). However, the court found that since repairing water plugs wasn't part of his usual job duties and he hadn't been specifically instructed to do so at this time, FELA did not apply because there was no negligence on behalf of Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co.. This decision emphasized that employers are only responsible for ensuring safety within employees’ defined roles and tasks they have been directly ordered to perform.

In the dissenting opinion for Norman v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., Justice James Clark McReynolds expressed his disagreement with the majority's decision to uphold a Maryland law that allowed railroads to eliminate grade crossings at their discretion, and required local governments to bear part of the cost. He argued that this law was unconstitutional because it took private property for public use without just compensation, violating the Fourteenth Amendment. In his view, when a railroad eliminates a grade crossing in order to improve its own service or safety record - rather than due to an explicit need from the community - it is acting out of self-interest and should therefore be responsible for all associated costs. He also disagreed with how much weight was given by other justices on precedents set by state courts; he believed that they were not binding on issues of federal constitutional law.